STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND … · Department of Insurance and Financial Services...
6
v STATE OF MI C HIGAN DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND FINANC IAL SERVICES Befo re th e Directo r of the Department of Insurance a nd Financia l Se rvi ces In the matter of : Department of Insurance and Financial Services Enforcement Case No. 17-14715 Age ncy No. 17-017-L Petitioner , Stephanie Walsh System ID No. 0605449 Respondent. Issued a nd entered on VY)tiLvc Vi \, 201 8 by Randall S. Gregg Deputy Di rector FINAL DECI SI ON I. Background Stephanie Walsh (Respondent) is a licensed resident insurance producer. The Department of Insurance and Financial Services (DIFS) received information that Respondenfs appoint m ent with St ate Farm was cancelled for cause for falsifying an application for insurance and issuing a fraudulent certificate of insurance for her personal benefit. After investigation and verificat i on of the informati on , on February 23, 2017, DI FS i ssued a Noti ce of Opportu ni ty to Show Compliance (NOSC) alleg i ng t hat Respon den t had provided just ification for revocation of l icensu re and other s anct ions pursu ant to Sect ions 1239(1) and 1244(1 )(a-d) of the Michigan Insurance Code (Code) , MCL 500. 1 239(1) and 500. 1 244(1 )(a-d) . Respondent failed to reply to the NOSC . On August 24, 2017, DIFS issued an Administrat ive Complain t and Order for Hearing which was served upon Respon d ent at the address s/he is requ i red to ma i ntain wi th DIFS. The Order fo r Hearing required Respondent to t ake one of the fol low in g actio ns wi t hin 21 days: (1) agree to a resolut i on of the case, (2) file a response to the allegations with a statement that Respondent planned to attend the hearing, or (3) request an adjournment. Respondent failed to respond or take any action. On March 8, 2018, DIFS Staff filed a Motion for Final Decision. Respondent did not file a reply to the motion. Given Respondent's fai lure to respond, Petitioner's motion is granted. The Administ rative Complaint, being unchallenged, is accepted as true. B ased u pon t he Adm in is t rat ive Compla in t, the Director makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusio ns of Law.
-
Upload
nguyenthuy -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND … · Department of Insurance and Financial Services...
v
STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES
Before the Director of the Department of Insurance and Financial Services
In the matter of:
Department of Insurance and Financial Services Enforcement Case No. 17-14715 Agency No. 17-017-L
Petitioner,
Stephanie Walsh System ID No. 0605449
Respondent. ~~~~~~~-------''
Issued and entered on VY)tiLvc Vi \, ~ 201 8
by Randall S. Gregg Deputy Director
FINAL DECISION
I. Background
Stephanie Walsh (Respondent) is a licensed resident insurance producer. The Department of Insurance and Financial Services (DIFS) received information that Respondenfs appointment with State Farm was cancelled for cause for falsifying an application for insurance and issuing a fraudulent certificate of insurance for her personal benefit. After investigation and verification of the information, on February 23, 2017, DIFS issued a Notice of Opportunity to Show Compliance (NOSC) alleging that Respondent had provided justification for revocation of licensure and other sanctions pursuant to Sections 1239(1) and 1244(1 )(a-d) of the Michigan Insurance Code (Code), MCL 500.1239(1) and 500.1244(1 )(a-d). Respondent failed to reply to the NOSC.
On August 24, 2017, DIFS issued an Administrative Complaint and Order for Hearing which was served upon Respondent at the address s/he is required to maintain with DIFS. The Order for Hearing required Respondent to take one of the followingactions within 21 days: (1) agree to a resolution of the case, (2) file a response to the allegations with a statement that Respondent planned to attend the hearing, or (3) request an adjournment. Respondent failed to respond or take any action.
On March 8, 2018, DIFS Staff filed aMotion for Final Decision. Respondent did not file a reply to the motion. Given Respondent's failure to respond, Petitioner's motion is granted. The Administrative Complaint, being unchallenged, is accepted as true. Based upon the Administrative Complaint, the Director makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
